Sunday, October 07, 2007

Oh what a circus!

The media are having the time of their lives over the non-election issue. They are squealing with glee over the way Brown has "climbed down" from calling an early election in the face of a Conservative revival.

I expect that most people who, like me, despise the Labour party of today are enjoying the discomfort that our new prime minister is now feeling.

But I do not. Why?

Have you considered why the media are in such high spirits?

It's easy to think that it's just because they like seeing the government, and Gordon Brown in particular, squirm like a fish on a hook.

But why would the media enjoy that? The media in general are wholly supportive of this government and the Labour party. Why would they now be enjoying their wriggling? Why at this time?

The reason is this - the media is dominated by liberal progressives. Along with the other institutions of British society who are also dominated by left wing progressives, the media have worked hard to achieve their aim of creating a Britain dominated entirely by left wing progressive ideals and policies.

The Britain of today is not an accident of history - it was a planned coup executed over decades to turn Britain into a socialist progressive one party state. And it has succeeded.

But it's also created a problem - because the people of Britain do not like what has been created. Yes, it's true that millions of people are reliant on it for their livelihoods and, as such, have become enslaved to the state, but don't think for a minute that they are all happy with the situation. Their children are also condemned to go to rubbish schools. Their streets are also cess pits of litter, grime and graffiti. Their lives are equally blighted by crime and disorder. They are as eager for that to change as I am - but they have no choice except to hope that the government will somehow change.

It won't.

The problem for the media, though, was the potential collapse of the one party state. Two weeks ago, the Conservative Party was in severe danger of going to an early election and being wiped out.

This would have killed the Tory party. Of course the remnants would have shuffled on as the "opposition", but to all intents and purposes it would have been finished as a political power in Britain.. The problem with that is that it would have created a vacuum on the right wing. Don't get me wrong - the Tory party is NOT right wing and has not been for 50 years or more - but it is the official party of the right and it is the party that most right wingers support in the misguided belief that they still harbour conservative values.

If there had been an election and if the Tory party had been wiped out then something would have had to replace it. This is inevitable. Conservative voters are not going to suddenly support Labour or the Lib Dems - they will look for a right wing alternative.

And that was the danger which the media recognised. The danger that, should the Tory party fall apart then there was a significant possibility that someone would rise to take their place - and the most likely candidate is not UKIP, but the BNP.

Whatever you may think of the BNP - and I know many people think very little of them - the truth is that they have become a very well organised and professional political party. Much more so than UKIP. The BNP are not particularly right wing, but the media have portrayed them as such and that means that many right wing voters now see the BNP as the real alternative to the Conservative Party. That alone should be a lesson to the media - you reap what you sow.

With the Tories trailing so far behind Labour in the polls, the media realised that danger that presented - and they resolved to do something about it. What they did was to talk up the Conservative party conference as some sort of revival. The way they fawned over the speeches of Osborne and Cameron is a joke.

Osborne's speech was as charismatic as a dead halibut. Cameron's speech was full of the empty rhetoric which he and the party he leads are now famous for. Taken on their own they would have been dismissed by any serious person as garbage, but the media seized on them and turned them into something they were not. They talked up the importance of Cameron's speech as the "speech of his life" before he delivered it - and then told us all that he had lived up to expectation.

Did he? I didn't think so. I thought he sounded like the wet liberal progressive toff he is - and in any other conference year he would have been lambasted for it. The media also hyped up the importance and impact of the Conservative "policies". And what were these incredibly popular and important policies which we have been waiting so long for. A cut in inheritance tax and stamp duty for first time buyers!

Good grief!! Is that it? Is that the saviour of the conservatism?

Well, the media succeeded in their objective. They have talked up the Tories enough to force Brown to call of any election and this is why they are so happy. They have postponed the inevitable for a little bit longer and ensured that, for now, their grand project is safe.

And there is one other reason the media are so happy.

It is because they have demonstrated to Gordon Brown, David Cameron and everyone else in political circles that REAL power resides in the hands of the media. It is they who have the power to make or break politicians and parties and they are revelling in that knowledge.


Sir HM said...

Excellent post Stan. Not much there I could pick at even if I was so inclined.

Yes, you're right about the BNP: it isn't particularly Right Wing. But ... it's a little more complex than that. The BNP is socially very right wing, or conservative (small c), and economically left wing without moving into Lenin territory.

I too believe the liberal progressives are terrified of the BNP.

bernard said...


What you have said in essence is that the liberal media, in cahoots with the liberal Govt agenda, purposely talked up the Tory threat in order to force Brown to back down from certain early electoral defeat so that the status quo could be maintained for the session of this parliament.
Ummm.... a rather convoluted and circuitous theory I think.
However, your last paragraph is certainly right. But even this has it's limitations if joe public collectively see it the other way.
The media desperately tried to scupper the Falklands campaign, but failed, largely due to contrary public sentiment. They even tried to sink old Mrs T over the Belgrano affair. But that failed too. In the end the media gave up, and Mrs T lost out eventually, to in-party wrangling, and nothing to do with media pressure.
So what I'm saying is that the media THINKS it represents public opinion with polls etc, but in reality the public despise both Brown AND Cameron and have not got exercised enough to put their 'Falklands' boot in yet.
It will come when the circumstances are right, and Brown or Cameron with their liberal agenda will just get swept away.

bernard said...

PS. It would be easier to comment on ATW but Squarespace are still having tec probs.

Sir HM said...


I've only read the introduction to this (it's going to take me hours to read the rest), but already I think it's a book you'll want to read: